| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Purcell <chris(dot)purcell(dot)39(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Sunir Shah <sunir(at)sunir(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Unexpected chunk number |
| Date: | 2006-09-12 20:44:16 |
| Message-ID: | 21404.1158093856@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Chris Purcell <chris(dot)purcell(dot)39(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> That will get you past the reported problem, but I wonder what other
>> corruption is lurking ... once you've managed to pg_dump you'd better
>> inspect the data very carefully.
> Would the best advice be to get a pg_dump, then drop the database
> entirely and rebuild it?
Definitely. It's entirely possible for pg_dump to dump successfully
from a database that still contains corruption. An example:
broken indexes on user tables. COPY just does a seqscan and never looks
at the contents of indexes ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Purcell | 2006-09-12 21:15:03 | Re: Unexpected chunk number |
| Previous Message | vodhner | 2006-09-12 18:23:03 | pgsql on Solaris 10 |